My Username

@mean_field_zane @DeepDishEnjoyer “Why were you there if you didn’t want to talk about anything real, it was a party of econ graduate students lol.”

@DeepDishEnjoyer I didn’t even bring up AI or math lol, she just assumed anyone there wanted to talk to her about that.

Met a really beautiful math PhD student at a house party last night. My friend and I tried talking to her, she immediately said “I don’t want to talk about AI or math” and fled the party. Why were you there if you didn’t want to talk about anything real, it was a party of econ graduate students lol.

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP Lmao ok

@PokeysaurusRex @atlanticesque @MorlockP Conservatives respect rule of law. Liberals do not and just ignore any that they disagree with. This attitude leads to anarchy.

The question isn't whether Americans prefer space or density. We live in a market economy and people can choose among different alternatives, according to price. The question is whether one side of a nearly 50/50 split should be able to ban the other side's preferences entirely

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP I’m not asking what you think is legal. I’m asking what you think is right. Do you think that whatever is legal is right?

@PokeysaurusRex @atlanticesque @MorlockP You must obey the law as long as you are under its jurisdiction. Any changes to the law must also be consistent with the state constitution. Individuals cannot just arbitrarily change it unilaterally.

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP So whatever is legal is fine with you?

@PokeysaurusRex @atlanticesque @MorlockP Rule of law is part of my beliefs. You cannot just arbitrarily do whatever you want. You need to provide a lawful path to achieve it. Tell me what that path is. How do you get from where we are today to where you want to be? In any case, you’re in Minnesota, not Texas.

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP And you think that if a majority of Texans want something different for your land use, they should be allowed to make that change?

@PokeysaurusRex @atlanticesque @MorlockP Yep. You can do that. Also, when in Rome, do as the Romans do. If you move to a new state, should you be trying to change that state into something different, or are you moving there because you like how it is already? I moved to Texas because I liked how it was already.

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP Once again, I’m not asking you what’s currently legal. I’m asking about your beliefs regarding what should be allowed. So far you’ve shown nothing but hypocrisy regarding who you think should be allowed to make decisions. Just “anything that results in what I want is good.”

@PokeysaurusRex @atlanticesque @MorlockP The municipal corporation doesn’t exist at a block level. There is a legal foundation for this that you are completely ignoring and you’re just using arbitrary collections without regard to existing strict territorial boundaries.

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP If you don’t like a state and their land use policies, pick a different state.

@PokeysaurusRex @atlanticesque @MorlockP If you don’t like a city and its land use policies, then pick another city. A city is like a business selling a product. The land use policies are part of the package deal of the product. You paid for it, implying you wanted it. You even agreed to the terms required to change it.

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP If residents of one block make a decision, and people who don’t live on that block tell them they can’t, how is that not being dictated to by others?

They’re not dictated by others. They chose it themselves. This seems to be going over your head. It’s like walking into a Mexican restaurant to eat and then getting upset when you’re served Mexican food, demanding Chinese food instead. Do you not hear yourself on how retarded that is?

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP I’m not talking about what is currently allowed. I’m asking you about your principles. Why would locals have their choices dictated to them by people who don’t live on that block?

@PokeysaurusRex @atlanticesque @MorlockP You become a shareholder in a municipal corporation when you reside in a community as an adult and citizen. As a shareholder, you’re entitled a right to a vote on the policies of that community. This is the legal basis for zoning, as established by the sovereign state.

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP If you follow your stated principles of local governance, that would be acceptable.

@PokeysaurusRex @atlanticesque @MorlockP Traffic citations are not felonies. Road speeds are also local to different areas because different safety conditions exist in different areas. Instead of thinking in terms of just abortions, why not talk about all murders? Should one city allow murder and another not allow it?

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP No, I’m talking about homeowners on one block being dictated to on what they can do by people who don’t live there. You said that you believe in locals being able to do what they want without outside interference. Why should people on one block not be able to do what they want?

@PokeysaurusRex @atlanticesque @MorlockP That’s not people on the outside. That’s the inside.

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP Ok, speed enforcement. “We can’t enforce different abortion laws in different municipalities” makes as much sense as “we can’t enforce different speed limits on different roads”.

@PokeysaurusRex @atlanticesque @MorlockP What type of parking enforcement do you imagine Colleyville has? 😂 I can’t think of any.

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP That’s people on the outside dictating what local property owners can do with their property. I thought you were against that.

@PokeysaurusRex @atlanticesque @MorlockP The municipality is the local government.

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP Why would they need permission? You said control should be maintained locally.

1) That would never happen and is in fact not the source of new apartments. 2) They can certainly tear down their own homes if they like, but they would have to get permission from the city to build a new structure there if said new structure is inconsistent with current established zoning rules for the lot. 3) Merging lots like this to build an apartment complex on would also require the permission of the city. You have distinct plats to consider. You can’t just unilaterally change them on your own even regardless of zoning. Proper deed records must be kept to ensure ownership is properly kept track of. 4) Infill imposes an externality burden upon the rest of the community. Their involvement is necessary. I’ve mentioned many of the negative effects (crime, traffic, schools, votes), but there are other financial ones to consider too. Existing city infrastructure was built around a certain master plan with a certain capacity requirement in mind. By suddenly increasing the density, you’ve prematurely obsoleted existing infrastructure and force it to be torn up and upgraded at the expense of other taxpayers. Those taxpayers have a right to veto this burden you’d be placing upon them.

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP I assure you that it’s not a problem to simply not prosecute people for having abortions in a certain municipality. It’s no more a problem for enforcement than having different parking enforcement in different areas of your city.

There is a practical issue with having super tiny states, which is essentially what you’re saying. You need to be able to enforce laws within a territorial jurisdiction for laws to be meaningful and that’s difficult if people can trivially leave that jurisdiction. There’s also massive duplicative redundancy that ends up occurring. Local governments are empowered by their states to pass ordinances primarily related to local real estate and infrastructure. They don’t have the power to create felonies or to eliminate them entirely, although district attorneys at the county level certainly try to do so in practice by refusing to prosecute laws that they don’t like.

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP So if all the homeowners on one block in your neighborhood decided to tear down their houses and build apartments, you’d be ok with that?

I’m not a hypocrite. I am not blocking what groups of homeowners can do. You seem to not understand that zoning rules largely predate home ownership and that homeowners entered into a contract with their city and neighbors when they purchased the lot, agreeing to the zoning terms. This is merely an enforcement of a contract. The real issue here is that you want to unilaterally void all such contracts against the will of the vast majority of homeowners who want to keep them and personally paid extra for the perk of having them, all to satiate the interests of OUTSIDE DEVELOPERS who don’t actually even own property there or reside there themselves. If existing residents truly wish to change the zoning of their current communities, they have the mechanisms to do so. They can support candidates that’ll approve their changes. They can speak up at P&Z and city council meetings when a request for comments from neighbors comes up. If individual homeowners find that they’re out of touch with their communities, then they’re free to move to any of the vast number of other alternative municipalities that offer them the type of lot that they prefer. Nobody is stopping them from doing this. Nobody except for YIMBYs that are trying to impose a one size fits all land use policy on everyone.

@freebird359 @CartoonsHateHer If you’re already planning for the divorce before you meet your wife, you’re ngmi I’m afraid.

@CartoonsHateHer If your wife stays at home you're financially screwed because you owe her lifetime compensation for "giving up her career". So it's money management 101 to always keep the wives working, at mcdonald's if necessary.

A lot of people are telling her she's obviously lying about them wanting the woman to have a career but it's fairly obvious that even if they don't care about ambition (big if) they want some evidence against the idea that she could be a gold digger

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP And what if a municipality in your state, which you are not a member of, wants to legalize it?

Here is a clear example: I view abortion as murder and that it should be prosecuted as such. Planned Parenthood is basically a genocidal organization on a greater scale of evil than even the Holocaust, having slaughtered 10x as many babies as the Nazis did Jews. Within my own state, I wish this evil to be heavily banned. Despite this, I do not advocate for red states to go to war with blue states to completely abolish the practice nationwide like had been done with slavery. States’ rights matter. Each state is sovereign and able to govern its own internal affairs. The role for the federal government is to regulate interstate commerce, so its only role in abortion is to ban the interstate sale of abortion services, but not abortions that occur wholly within a state. It lacks the constitutional power to broadly police murders.

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP But when a small group of homeowners wants to do what they want with their land, you don’t want them to have that freedom. You’re a hypocrite whose only principle of governance is getting what you want, when you want it, how you want it.

@PokeysaurusRex @atlanticesque @MorlockP All of this is federalism. It’s about the right to self-government and allowing for regional and local autonomy.

@AgileJebrim @atlanticesque @MorlockP I don’t think that at all, and it speaks to a fundamental difference in outlook that we have. While I obviously have a preference for liberal government, that’s not the source of my concern.

The residents of each jurisdiction have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. Liberal areas want to stay liberal. Conservative areas want to stay conservative. Many people paid big money to live in an area that shares their values and don’t want that going away. The problem with your narrative is that you think I’m also in favor of changing existing liberal areas and making them conservative. This is false. I instead just want them to leave us alone. They’re the ones trying to turn our areas blue. They’re the aggressors here. We’re purely playing defense and leaving them alone.